From: "Tony Jollans" My forename at my surname dot on
I think we are misunderstanding each other here. I was thinking of sorting
as a logical process, whilst you were concerned about possible constraints
that VBA might impose on a physical process.

I don't know what size random access file might realistically be needed for
your data, but until Office 2010 is released (next month, I believe) there
is only a 32-bit version of VBA, and I'm pretty sure you will trip over a
2-gigabyte limit somewhere or other

I have never come across this kind of code in VBA myself, so can't help on
that score, I'm afraid.

--
Enjoy,
Tony

www.WordArticles.com

"GB" <NOTsomeone(a)microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:4bc224d3$0$2482$db0fefd9(a)news.zen.co.uk...
> Tony Jollans wrote:
>> Word is not a database tool. Small amounts of data can be dealt with
>> withn it, but 1GB will exceed the maximum document size, and, even if
>> it didn't, performance would likely be dreadful, so, even if you want
>> to access it from Word, you will have to hold it somewhere else.
>
> The way a tree sort works is that you set up a large random access file on
> disk. You add the records one at a time, with pointers (ie an additional
> field with the record number) to the next record. As you add more records,
> you just change the pointers in the 'adjacent' records accordingly. So,
> Word only needs to have enough space for 3 records in memory at a time.
>
> I just thought that, rather than programming this myself, I would see if
> somebody else has already done this and tested it?
>
> When you said it wouldn't work, I was worried that you meant there are
> restrictions on random access file sizes that vba can handle - something
> like that. There may be of course, but you didn't mention this.
>
>
>